Bart, Clark and Goddard published a excellent book: The Trout and the Fly. Among other topics it discusses very well the issue of a dry fly's visibility from subsurface - the trout's view. They discovered that throut see footprints, color of body and under certain circumstances the wings as well. They are speaking about the trouts window and a mirror - worth knowing for the nymph fisherman too.
So from my point of view: I ty an Adams with wings and a Red Tag without <G>. Wings add visibility to a fly - for the fish and for the fisherman like others mentioned previously. I obverved trout rising for flower petals from roses. Roses do not have wings... ANd I remember to catch fish on a bare hook when I was a child. So, I guess it depends on the situation. Rene -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Datum: Sonntag, 20. Januar 2002 07:39 Betreff: [VFB] To Wing or Not To Wing >I know I am going to cause a heavy debate with this one so here it goes. I >know when we tie in wings on or dry patterns it makes the fly look better and >in some cases I can see how it would make it float better. Here is the >question I am asking; trout do not see the top of the fly all they see is the >"footprint", so why put wings on them? The Adams has wings but the Flightless >Adams does not and it is just as effective as its older brother and tied the >same way with the same materials. So again I ask why wings? The Mosquito >pattern calls for wings and to be honest I have tied them with and without >wings and have had better luck with the wingless variety, and only use one >hackle in the process too. Hmmmmm, one material fly swap, sounds intresting. >Might have to host that one after the Pet Hair Swap. Folks I would like to >hear your thoughts and comments on this question. > >Thanks, >Bart >
